List Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps with URLs and last modified dates to find historical news beyond the rolling news feed.
List Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps. Lists Bloomberg's monthly news sitemaps, each with its url and last_modified date. Use them to find historical news beyond the rolling latest feed at /bloomberg/news. Takes no parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses that the tool returns a list of sitemaps each with url and last_modified, and that it takes no parameters. It does not mention pagination, rate limits, or that sitemap URLs must be fetched separately to reach articles, which keeps it from a 5.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. The first sentence is largely repeated by the second ('List Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps' / 'Lists Bloomberg's monthly news sitemaps'), a minor redundancy that keeps it from a 5.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (sitemap entries with url/last_modified) and why to use it (historical news). It omits any hint of the follow-up step needed to actually retrieve articles, a small gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms 'Takes no parameters,' reinforcing that no configuration is required.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps) and distinguishes itself from the rolling feed at /bloomberg/news. It also names the sibling domain (bloomberg_news) implicitly, so an agent can tell it apart. Not quite a 5 because the first two sentences restate the same point.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Gives clear when-to-use guidance: 'Use them to find historical news beyond the rolling latest feed at /bloomberg/news.' This explicitly contrasts with the alternative feed. It stops short of a full when/when-not statement (e.g., when you want current headlines, use bloomberg_news).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.